2006 (5) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The order is challenged on the ground that the transaction value cannot be rejected in the absence of any evidence produced by the Revenue. It is contended that the Revenue has proceeded to enhance the value by obtaining the price from the manufacturer on the basis of the age of the machine and granting deductions on the same. Learned counsel submits that there are no grounds available for rejecting the transaction value in terms of Section 14 of Customs Act. He also submits that there are no grounds available for the Revenue to charge undervaluation and there is also no case made out for rejecting the transaction value in terms of Rule 14(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules. Merely because t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence the judgment in the case of Tolin Rubbers and the Tribunal ruling in the case of SS International (supra) is applied. 3. On a careful consideration we agree with the learned counsel that in the present case there is no charge of undervaluation of the goods. In such a circumstance, the transaction value cannot be rejected as held by the Apex Court in similar circumstance in respect of import of second hand machineries in the case of Tolin Rubbers Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal in the case of S&S International on this very issue applied the ratio of the judgment in the case Tolin Rubbers and upheld the acceptance of declared transaction value. The finding recorded by the Tribunal in Paras 2 & 3 are reproduced herein below. "2.&ems....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt is that the transaction value is required to be accepted in the absence of any evidence of contemporaneous import. This plea is supported by a large number of judgments of the Tribunal and the Apex Court. The Apex Court, in the case of Sounds-N-Images v. CC [2000 (117) E.L.T. 538 (S.C.)] has clearly held that the burden of undervaluation is on the Revenue and it is required to be established. The Apex Court has also held that there has to be evidence of contemporaneous import and in the absence of the same, the transaction value is required to be accepted. The Tribunal, in the case of Sai Impex v. CC [1992 (62) E.L.T. 616 (T)], has also held that the transaction value is required to be accepted in the absence of evidence of contemporaneo....